The world failed Ecuador on its Yasuní initiative
|
Version 0 of 1. It was with a heavy heart that Ecuador's President Rafael Correa recently announced the end of the pioneering Yasuní ITT initiative. Six years ago, the president, with great enthusiasm, announced this proposal at the UN. Ecuador would leave the vast oil reserves underground in the Yasuní national park. These constitute 20% of the nation's oil deposits. The country would forgo half of these oil revenues – at the time worth $3.6bn – if it received the other half through international compensation based on donations placed in a UN administered trust. This compensation had an environmental and economic logic: it created a fair payment for the generation of an environmental service. The decision to withdraw this groundbreaking proposal has understandably attracted much comment. But some of this gives a misleading impression, failing to address the real reasons my government was forced to take this decision. The Yasuní proposal was always based on the principle of co-responsibility in the battle against climate change. A battle that Ecuador takes very seriously. My country's new constitution, passed in 2008, is the first in the world to recognise legally enforceable rights of nature. Under the Yasuní initiative, Ecuador, a developing country and a marginal polluter, would share in its responsibility to the planet. But governments and others in the developed, and more polluting, countries would also share in theirs. Without international political will to give the financial support, the Yasuní initiative was never going to succeed. Tragically, it was the fundamental reason it did not. Despite strenuous efforts by the Ecuadorian government, including establishing a secretary of state devoted to this scheme, the financial backing fell way short of the widespread expressions of support. In fact, just 0.37% of the target was provided by international donors. This made the scheme unworkable. The Ecuadorian government would have had to forgo nearly 100% of the oil revenue. That was never the proposal. This failure of the international community touches on the wider issue of justice in the battle against climate change. What level of responsibility should be taken by the developed nations that have most contributed to the problem of climate change and are most able to tackle it? And what by the less developed nations? Clearly, a just solution would see the more developed nations bare proportionally more of the responsibility? Yet Ecuador was not asking for this, and certainly not for charity, with the Yasuní initiative. This does not bode well for future discussions on creating a just and realisable international framework to fight climate change. Critics who readily dismiss these financial arguments fail to address the serious matter of under-development in Ecuador. How can a poorer country like Ecuador gain the resources to ensure its population has access to the basic necessities of health, education, food and housing? Great strides have been taken in recent years to improve Ecuador's human development indices. Nonetheless, ongoing poverty reduction efforts are essential. UN figures show 32% of Ecuadorians remain in poverty – and this affects more than half of those living in rural and indigenous communities. Other indices show that more than one-third of the population live in housing that has inadequate water and sewage facilities, while one in five children suffers from chronic malnutrition. Not acting to tackle poverty and underdevelopment will damage the environment as communities engage in illegal logging and as sewage pollutes the waters. The decision to exploit oil in Yasuní needs to be understood in this socio-economic context. Ecuador needs these revenues to help the transition of its economy away from commodity exploitation and to a more diversified and high-value one based on knowledge, including bio-knowledge. This is the aim of Ecuador's national plan for good living. As the Yasuní national park comprises more than 1m hectares and just 0.1% of it will be affected by the decision, there will not be widespread destruction to it. The dilemma facing Ecuador was whether to maintain 100% of Yasuní and have no resources, or to leave 99.9% of Yasuní untouched with billions for Ecuador to invest in much needed human development. Sadly, on Yasuní the world failed to show the will needed. We cannot afford the world to fail on other proposals. <em>• Dr Juan Falconi Puig is Ecuador's ambassador to the UK</em> Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. |